Forum adverts like this one are shown to any user who is not logged in. Join us by filling out a tiny 3 field form and you will get your own, free, dakka user account which gives a good range of benefits to you: No adverts like this in the forums anymore. Times and dates in your local timezone. Full tracking of what you have read so you can skip to your first unread post, easily see what has changed since you last logged in, and easily see what is new at a glance. Email notifications for threads you want to watch closely. Being a part of the oldest wargaming community on the net. If you are already a member then feel free to login now.

Or, you know, we can talk civilly about the topic.

Yes, board size will impact how Vanguard will play, same as board size has impacted Assault-based armies for decades. There are way more turn 1 charges in 10e than in 6e, for example, both because of smaller boards AND because (with a few exceptions) the movement stat of assault armies has generally increased. (Also, Infiltrators are allowed to assault on turn 1 now.) The Vanguard-wide allowance for "charge after Advancing" is essentially a restoration of the old rules for "Fleet of foot," which I appreciate!

I think terrain density is actually the more relevant issue in terms of how the army will play, though. It appears that we've largely left "Planet Bowling Ball" in the distant past, and I don't mind that at all, but Vanguard is going to be fragile. This isn't a Custodes assault army - you're going to be moving LARGE units of far more fragile models, with individually far weaker stat lines. From the math, I like the point-for-point odds for a unit of 'stealers + Broodlord against just about anything, but it's much harder to DELIVER 2 of those units (22 models, 520 pts) to a single target at the same time than it would be to get, say, 6 Custodians + Blade Champion (7 models, 540 pts) to the same destination.

This has some knock-on effects.
1) You can't plan on having full units after turn 1, and even on turn 1, you'll be relying on Unseen Lurker to keep one target pristine.

2) You have to preplan your movement paths, so you don't create your own traffic jams. Gargoyles are faster than genestealers, but take up a lot of board area - you need to be able to get them out of the way at the right time and in a meaningful direction, while also not blocking the arrival of flying hive tyrant(s), all while trying to focus your whole army on a narrow frontage (so that you can overwhelm a target point, rather than spread your troops too wide).

3) You also need to pay attention to your opponent's ability to maneuver, and choose which of their lanes to clog up. A unit of 20 Gargoyles at maximum dispersion can fill almost 1 square foot of the board surface, and even Monsters and Vehicles can't stop moving on top of your models. Use that. Denying your opponent the ability to leave their deployment zone for a turn is worth sacrificing 150 pts.

4) You need to know which units you can spare. You're not going to be able to hide a whole assault wave on most boards, which means a combination of crafty use of (Strategic) Reserves and a willingness to sacrifice something. Got an opponent with a large volume of low-quality shooting? Let them see a Flyrant and burn off a ton of their shots, instead of mowing down Genestealers. If it's the other way around (as is more likely), then maybe you flip the script and give them 'stealers to shoot at...or maybe you let them commit (via positioning) to going for your Flyrant and then Unseen Lurker at a key point in their shooting phase.

5) Since this is pretty clearly going to be a maneuver-heavy army, keeping a 2 CP buffer for a crucial "Hypersensory Scillia" could be really valuable at times. Could pull units right out of threatened range, and back to where Unseen Lurker will preserve them (but now we're talking a 3 CP buffer).

Lictors remain vaguely interesting to me, notwithstanding all their issues, as Lone Operative (plus careful deployment and/or screening means you don't have to worry about them as much. What does the charge of 3 Lictors + 3 Neurolictors (375 pts) actually look like? Each one takes some dedicated killing, both because of Lone Operative and because there is no carry-over between units. You could actually make a very annoying list based around Lone Operative (Lictors, Neurolictors, Deathleaper, Parasites of Mortrex, maybe with a bunch of Biovores tossed in), and it would be really good at Fixed Objectives (between Infiltrate, Pheromone Trail, and Invisible Hunter). But you'd have to find some way to actually kill things.

Edit: Actually, HBMC, that might be an answer to "how to use (Neuro)Lictors." Don't think of them as individuals at all; think of them as a single unit that happens to move separately, and have to be targeted individually to kill them. And then decide if a unit with 18 T6 wounds and 18 S7 AP2 D2 attacks (plus all the rest) is worth the 180 pts to you. FWIW, I don't think it was an accident they dropped the Invulnerable save; 40k prizes "Fights First" pretty highly (plus Neurolictors are T5 instead of T6).

I may have just talked myself into 3 Lictors + 3 Neurolictors. Hmm.

I think the lictor is one of the best units in the codex. Lone operator, deep strike, OK fighting, cheap. And he can rapid ingress for free.

Rapid ingress 12,01 away. Get the charge next turn guaranteed. Most armies include som small unit to hold objective, and these are the prime targets.

The neurolictor I am not as sold on. But it could have some leggs. (The online community certainly likes them.) Park them so that the enemy can not hold an objective without having to be in its aura and you are good. If you can be on the other side of a wall while doing so that is even better.

The deathlesper is like a mix of them. You pay the CP but he forces leadership checks.

Most armies that are Tyranids should be running these to make the opponents primary objective difficult. They are even better in this detachments, but not by so much I believe.

The flyrant seems more cool in this type of list. Although I am not sure about loadout. 9 attacks vs 5 good twin linked options. He also need the camouflage strat.

I scratch build 3 lictors from before. And I bought the deathlesper and the neurolictor. I need to test them out.

I also think guard goyles as movement blockers is insane if you get first turn. Have them come in turn 1. Shoot/move and now the opponent is boxed in.

I would assume that rapid ingress lictors are hard to place, since they cannot deep strike. So you need an open flank for this to work.

Damn. I thought they had innate deep strike.

They always did but somehow lost it now that they can infiltrate in 10th.

I don't have the Codex in front of me, so can someone tell me if the Winged Hive Tyrant has the Vanguard Invader keyword?

 Janthkin wrote:
Edit: Actually, HBMC, that might be an answer to "how to use (Neuro)Lictors." Don't think of them as individuals at all; think of them as a single unit that happens to move separately, and have to be targeted individually to kill them. And then decide if a unit with 18 T6 wounds and 18 S7 AP2 D2 attacks (plus all the rest) is worth the 180 pts to you.

Possibly. Certainly worth trying out.

 Janthkin wrote:
FWIW, I don't think it was an accident they dropped the Invulnerable save; 40k prizes "Fights First" pretty highly (plus Neurolictors are T5 instead of T6).

And I think you just put more thought into it than whomever wrote the rules ever did.

 H.B.M.C. wrote:
I don't have the Codex in front of me, so can someone tell me if the Winged Hive Tyrant has the Vanguard Invader keyword?

Affirmative. He does.

Holy...

Well... that changes things.

Thanks for answering so fast.

 H.B.M.C. wrote:

 Janthkin wrote:
FWIW, I don't think it was an accident they dropped the Invulnerable save; 40k prizes "Fights First" pretty highly (plus Neurolictors are T5 instead of T6).

And I think you just put more thought into it than whomever wrote the rules ever did.

I mean, this is the company that thinks a 10 pt 4+ FNP is an appropriate enhancement for a c'tan (while charging Tyranids 25 pts for a 5+ FNP that can turn into a 4+), so you're probably right. But in an alternate universe, it kind of makes sense?

More generally, the analysis I haven't written out yet is to look at whether running a Vanguard list makes sense, given the opportunity cost of NOT running one of the other Detachments. All the units are available to everyone*, so it's mostly "are the Detachment special rules, enhancements, and stratagems in a Vanguard list better than those available to the other Detachments, when viewed through the lens of a list that focuses on Vanguard Invaders?" It feels like the answer is yes (and Questing Tendrils + Unseen Lurker is a large part of that feeling), but I could probably make arguments for Invasion Fleet and (surprisingly) Assimilation Swarm, and I have questions about how the Synaptic Nexus would actually play out. How much is Vanguard Invader-wide Fleet worth?

*Except for Deathleaper as Warlord, 'cause that's a meaningful option.

I'll try and get some battlefield time in soon.

 H.B.M.C. wrote:
Holy...

Well... that changes things.

I mean, there's a reason I was talking about using Unseen Lurker on the Flyrant...

 Janthkin wrote:
More generally, the analysis I haven't written out yet is to look at whether running a Vanguard list makes sense, given the opportunity cost of NOT running one of the other Detachments. All the units are available to everyone*, so it's mostly "are the Detachment special rules, enhancements, and stratagems in a Vanguard list better than those available to the other Detachments, when viewed through the lens of a list that focuses on Vanguard Invaders?"

Which I feel is a massive failing of the whole Detachment system.

If Detachments determined the structure of your army by defining what was Battleline, then I think there'd be some real choices to make there. But as every army, structurally, is 100% the same, so it's just a case of "Which special rule do I like more?".

Moving away from Tyranids, look at the upcoming 1st Company detachment rule. Why would anyone in their right mind choose that over the current Doctrines that Marines can get? A once-per-game buff against one target vs 3 army-wide buffs. There's literally no comparison between the two (and it's frustrating that the clowns writing this don't see that as a problem). No, if 1st Company armies had Terminators/Veterans as Battleline, and the Enhancements/Strats supported that, then that might make a difference. As it stands, taking anything beyond the default detachment is (currently) more a case of what you're giving up, not what you're gaining.

I also think that every army should have default non-detachment-based Enhancements/Strats, specifically the Combat Patrol ones (that'd be a good start at least), so no matter what any specific army always has access to a base core of Enhancements/Strats that can be used with any detachment. And Battleline should be a Special Rule and not a Keyword handed out by Detachments and not inherent to any unit. And that the limit on how many Enhancements you can take doesn't make any sense because you pay points for them (unlike every other upgrade), so imposing a further limitation on them is stupid. But these are separate issues...

 Janthkin wrote:
It feels like the answer is yes (and Questing Tendrils + Unseen Lurker is a large part of that feeling), but I could probably make arguments for Invasion Fleet and (surprisingly) Assimilation Swarm, and I have questions about how the Synaptic Nexus would actually play out. How much is Vanguard Invader-wide Fleet worth?

Advance + Charge is a (potentially) powerful rule. Perhaps a bit more powerful if I could field more than 30 of my 120 Genestealers at a time (like if the Detachment made them Battleline... ). As for the Assimilation Swarm... self-healing Haruspexes has a certain ring to it.

Synaptic Nexus highlights an issue with Tyranid rules. It's Marine Doctrines, but with extra steps. They get it just by being Marines. We get it, but we have to use synapse to make it work.

Now don't get me wrong - I like the integration of Synapse within our rules. I lamented the loss of Synaptic Links from 9th, as I thought that was such a cool rule, so I was very happy to see lots of rules and Strats that were "This does X, but if within Synapse, it does Y!", as it meant that our abilities could be used, but were better if we were playing the army as intended. Well done GW. You married fluff to rules in a manner you often fail at. Congrats!

However, this Detachment doesn't have anything like that. If they were all a two step process (Get a 6+(I) save, but 5+(I) if within Synapse, etc.) then maybe there'd be something more to it. Meanwhile, a Vanguard Invader gets Assault + Charge just by existing. Doesn't need Synapse for that...

 Janthkin wrote:
I mean, there's a reason I was talking about using Unseen Lurker on the Flyrant...

I knew the Winged Tyranid Prime - still the oddest duck in the book - had it. Wasn't sure if the Flyrant did.

Happy it does though. Man, if only Venom Cannons weren't completely worthless.

I can accept mediocre variation from Detachments, both because a) I remember Formations; and b) there are so many rules exceptions already that having Detachments also fundamentally alter army construction just seems an extra step too far.

(But don't forget about Lucius the Eternal; he, at least, actually DOES change what is Battleline! Not in a way that anyone wants to actually do, but it's there.)

It would be nice if Synapse was meaningful. Remember when it blocked Instant Death, because the Hive Mind would just puppet the bodies until they fell apart? Synapse as a Damage-reducer would have been very nice. But again - GW does not tend towards subtle, so a Synapse that is meaningful is often accompanied by significant punishment for the lack of Synapse (see, again, "Instinctive Behavior").

I hear you on Genestealers; I have 80 or so (Ymgarl, extended carapace, etc.). If they'd just bump max unit size to 20, I'd be content.

Interestingly, when they were type-setting this Codex, you could have used the Hive Tyrant to cast Unseen Lurker 2x/turn; that would have been awesome; possibly TOO awesome. (Remember 4th ed "Siren" on Slaaneshi characters?)

Regenerating Haruspexes, sure; I was thinking about using Ripper swarms to regenerate Genestealers, though. Broodlord w/the regeneration booster, bunch of Parasites flying around to hopefully make more Rippers, who then die & trigger the stratagem for yet more regeneration.

I don't hate the Venom Cannon. More to the point, I feel that the Flyrant HAS to have a gun, just to unlock all those secondaries that require the ability to Shoot in order to do anything. It's too pricey a model to be completely shut out scoring points when I need it to. And if I'm going to stick a gun on it (and multiple sets of Devourers aren't an allowable option), then D3 S9 Ap2 D3 shots that hit on a 2+ are ok. (Be nice if it was Assault.)

 Janthkin wrote:
I can accept mediocre variation from Detachments, both because a) I remember Formations; and b) there are so many rules exceptions already that having Detachments also fundamentally alter army construction just seems an extra step too far.

These wouldn't be formations though. It's just changing what Battleline is. I don't think there's anything wrong with making Terminators be Battleline in a 1st Company army, vanilla Russes in an Armoured Company, or Carnifexes in a Crusher Stampede (the quintessential Tyranid monster, and when you take as many as you can - 3 units of 2 - they literally cannot benefit from the Crusher Stampede's special rule). I think Detachments are a massive, missed opportunity (a hallmark of GW behaviour). I mean, I can't even field Mechanised Infantry with the current rules due to the limitations on transports. And forget about my Air Cav. If Detachments won't influence structure, then these armies basically don't exist anymore.

 Janthkin wrote:
(But don't forget about Lucius the Eternal; he, at least, actually DOES change what is Battleline! Not in a way that anyone wants to actually do, but it's there.)

And I remember when armies were tied to Special Characters... we certainly don't want those days to return.

 Janthkin wrote:
It would be nice if Synapse was meaningful. Remember when it blocked Instant Death, because the Hive Mind would just puppet the bodies until they fell apart? Synapse as a Damage-reducer would have been very nice. But again - GW does not tend towards subtle, so a Synapse that is meaningful is often accompanied by significant punishment for the lack of Synapse (see, again, "Instinctive Behavior").

I'll be one of the few who really didn't like the anti-Instant Death rule. Sure, it might have made Warriors viable, but it never rang true to me and felt like GW once again throwing gak at the wall to see what worked because they didn't like what came before.

I think Synapse interacting with strats/abilities to enhance them is the right way to use synapse.

 Janthkin wrote:
I hear you on Genestealers; I have 80 or so (Ymgarl, extended carapace, etc.). If they'd just bump max unit size to 20, I'd be content.

And, while they're at it, put Gaunt units back to 30!

 Janthkin wrote:
Interestingly, when they were type-setting this Codex, you could have used the Hive Tyrant to cast Unseen Lurker 2x/turn; that would have been awesome; possibly TOO awesome.

Can you explain what you mean by this?

 Janthkin wrote:
(Remember 4th ed "Siren" on Slaaneshi characters?)

We try not to remember the Age of Fzorgle.

 Janthkin wrote:
Regenerating Haruspexes, sure; I was thinking about using Ripper swarms to regenerate Genestealers, though. Broodlord w/the regeneration booster, bunch of Parasites flying around to hopefully make more Rippers, who then die & trigger the stratagem for yet more regeneration.

That would require buying more Parasites. I bought one as it was interesting. I just can't see a world where I'm fielding 3. And speaking of Synapse, boy I wish Broodlords still had that...

 Janthkin wrote:
I don't hate the Venom Cannon. More to the point, I feel that the Flyrant HAS to have a gun, just to unlock all those secondaries that require the ability to Shoot in order to do anything. It's too pricey a model to be completely shut out scoring points when I need it to. And if I'm going to stick a gun on it (and multiple sets of Devourers aren't an allowable option), then D3 S9 Ap2 D3 shots that hit on a 2+ are ok. (Be nice if it was Assault.)

It's a weapon that, like the Melta, got left behind and forgotten in the big shuffle. Now it's rando-shots and rando damage. I've seen people call it the "Casino Cannon", as the odds of it being fantastic are never in your favour.

 H.B.M.C. wrote:

 Janthkin wrote:
Interestingly, when they were type-setting this Codex, you could have used the Hive Tyrant to cast Unseen Lurker 2x/turn; that would have been awesome; possibly TOO awesome.

Can you explain what you mean by this?

Balance Dataslate wrote:STRATAGEMS THAT CAN BE USED MORE
THAN ONCE PER PHASE/TURN
Rules that allow you to use a Stratagem even if
another unit has been targeted by that Stratagem
this phase or turn, but that do not specify the name
of the Stratagem, can only be used to use Battle
Tactic Stratagems.

Until the Balance Dataslate came out, any Stratagem would have been a valid target for the [Flying] Hive Tyrant's Will of the Hive Mind. So when they were writing the Codex, the option to use Unseen Lurkers twice a turn was baked in (once by paying for it, once from WotHM), and GW was presumable ok with that. But since Unseen Lurkers isn't a Battle Tactic Stratagem, we never got to experience it that way.

 H.B.M.C. wrote:

 Janthkin wrote:
I don't hate the Venom Cannon. More to the point, I feel that the Flyrant HAS to have a gun, just to unlock all those secondaries that require the ability to Shoot in order to do anything. It's too pricey a model to be completely shut out scoring points when I need it to. And if I'm going to stick a gun on it (and multiple sets of Devourers aren't an allowable option), then D3 S9 Ap2 D3 shots that hit on a 2+ are ok. (Be nice if it was Assault.)

It's a weapon that, like the Melta, got left behind and forgotten in the big shuffle. Now it's rando-shots and rando damage. I've seen people call it the "Casino Cannon", as the odds of it being fantastic are never in your favour.

Fair enough. I don't love all the D3 shot weapons in 10e, but at least the Venom Cannon isn't random damage, and the AP is high enough to drop Custodes/Terminators/etc. onto their 4+ invulnerable save.

And again, I think you put more time into that explanation than GW ever did when writing/testing these rules.

Thanks though.

Here's what I ran for game one:
Flyrant (Chameleonic)
Swarmlord
Deathleaper
Broodlord
Winged Prime (Stalker)
10x Genestealers
10x Genestealers
10x Genestealers
10x Gargoyles
10x Gargoyles
3x Zoanthropes in Tyrannocyte
Barbed Hierodule
Mucolic Spore ('cause I had leftover points)


A few thoughts after my first game:
1) There are a lot of potential one-use weapons in this Detachment. Genestealers can clobber units on the front lines...and then they're too close for Unseen Lurker to save them from reprisals. Gargoyles can drop on objectives, but they're fragile as heck. Zoanthropes are brutal falling out of pod, but mobility is rather limited after that, meaning they can be isolated and destroyed.

Again, it's a placement game. If your opponent builds a strong castle, then cracking it will HURT your army. But the counter-position is true - if they're holding a strong castle, it means their ability to go out and achieve objectives is exceedingly limited. And this is why the Neuronode enhancement might be worthwhile - you can bait your opponent's deployment, see who is going first, and then flip things around significantly.

2) Vanguard Invader units are poor anti-tank/anti-monster units. Going to have to fill those slots with something else. The Barbed Hierodule was handy in this particular game, but may be a giant target for guns that would otherwise lack targets against a Vanguard list.

3) The Flyrant has very few options for Will of the Hive Mind (can't use on command rerolls, as that stratagem has no Target). But Surprise Assault is a good one, in that the Flyrant can always target himself with that (and rerolling 1's for the Venom Cannon is handy).

4) Don't forget that Gargoyles are Battleline. OC 2 is great in a drop/shoot/scoot unit.

Next list will have less chaff. The Winged Prime is out, for lack of a good reason to use him, and Deathleaper will probably be downgraded to a standard Lictor. Might try 2x Genestealers and 3x Gargoyles, and use the points saved to try a couple of Neurolictors. (Eventually, the Swarmlord will also be swapped for a second Winged Tyrant and another Lictor/Neurolictor, but I have to build some models first.)

Swarmlord worth taking without Tyrant Guard?

Everything's expendable. He's far from the fastest threat coming up the field, so shooting at him means ignoring things like the Flyrant.

I do like the extra CP, and his torrent weapon + twin-linked melee attacks, but I think I'll like a second winged tyrant & 10 more gargoyles more.

It is worth pointing out that Supprice Assault technically is not legal to use as the free stratagem. As it is currently worded it targets both you and your opponents units. After the latest FAQ your opponents unit needs an abillaty that somehow makes your stratagems cost no CP - in addition to your hive tyrants abillaty. At least as I understand the latest rules update. My last two games I ignored this as I believe it to be a mistake in the FAQ.

I did not know command re-roll does not target. That means the core rules datasheet include only one stratagem that ca be free. And if the above is true we only have one in that detachment. Go to ground and pressission in melee. 😭

Anyway, hear with your opponent if you can use the Supprice Assault stratagem.

When I played this detachment my opponent was an Ork and sis not care for gak about the threats of a first turn charge. I got first turn charge and lost 300 points of von Ryan's leapers in my opponents turn. After turn 2 whaaag I mostly had my flyrant left in the board. The rest could not contest points.

I had 9 zoanthropes as my anti tank and I would advice having much more. 6 of them outflanked shooting up his truck (Arive from reserves turn 1.) Then the truck containing flashgits and badrukk overwayched the von Ryan's leapers. With lethal hit, sustained hits 1 and re-roll to wound. Badrukk rolled 2 6's with the re-roll killing 4 leapers. The flashgits overkilled the remaining 2.

The leapers that charged his squig high boys (to keep the zoanthropes alive) got turn appart. They killed perhaps 1 out of the 7 piggs, I do not remember.

All in all this detachment needs a clearification on the supprice assault. And I think I will be trying out the other detachments. I find this one to.difficuot to build around. (I won my game vs tau. But that was because my opponent did not dare to leave his deployment zone.)

I doubt GW meant for that restriction to be part of it because I doubt they realised it had that interaction in the first place.

The restriction came because deathwatch has a stratagem that targets two units. Or at least that is my suspicion.

Genestealer cult also has a stratagem that targets two friendly units and an opponents unit. Even if they have two nexos in the units the opponent targeting screws them over.

But flyrant in vanguard is dead unless you ignore that part of the rule. With the ignored bit the flyrant was very good in both my games. Lone operator stratagem on him is very strong.

Niiai wrote:It is worth pointing out that Supprice Assault technically is not legal to use as the free stratagem. As it is currently worded it targets both you and your opponents units. After the latest FAQ your opponents unit needs an abillaty that somehow makes your stratagems cost no CP - in addition to your hive tyrants abillaty. At least as I understand the latest rules update. My last two games I ignored this as I believe it to be a mistake in the FAQ.

Argh. Well, that seriously diminishes the value of the Flyrant.

Niiai wrote:6 of them outflanked shooting up his truck (Arive from reserves turn 1.)

Zoanthropes aren't Vanguard Invaders, so I guess you're using a squad of 6? I worry that concentrating that much in a single unit out on the flank would end up wasteful (or eat a lot of CPs, first to arrive early, then to get pulled back off the board via Invisible Hunter).

Yeah. But that squad of flashgits has to go one way or another.

I think my error lay in the list I build.

I also highly encourage you to discuss using Supprice Assault with your opponent, because othervice that flyrant is pure Garbo. In fact a lot of the detachment becomes much worse as it is one of the few good tricks it has.

I thought the change to free strats was just the restriction to Battle Tactics only. Or was there another one? Where does this targeting restriction come from?

Edit: Re-read the dataslate and found it, but I don't think it kills using those abilities on Command Re-roll, as the restriction only applies to strats that are targeting multiple units (it says nothing about that you can't use it on a strat that has no target at all).

 ZergSmasher wrote:
I thought the change to free strats was just the restriction to Battle Tactics only. Or was there another one? Where does this targeting restriction come from?

Edit: Re-read the dataslate and found it, but I don't think it kills using those abilities on Command Re-roll, as the restriction only applies to strats that are targeting multiple units (it says nothing about that you can't use it on a strat that has no target at all).

The Command Re-roll problem comes from the Will of the Hive Mind: "Once per turn, one friendly Tyranids unit within 12"...can be targeted with a Stratagem for 0CP."

Command Re-roll has no target, so you can't target a friendly unit with it. This issue doesn't come out of the Balance Dataslate; it's been there all along.

The "Surprise Assault" problem comes from the Balance Dataslate:

Rules that modify the CP cost of a Stratagem when
you target a particular unit can only do so for a
Stratagem that targets multiple units if every unit
you target has the same ability to modify the CP of
that Stratagem.

Surprise Assault targets both a Tyranid Vanguard Invader unit AND an enemy unit (which won't have the "0CP" ability).

 Janthkin wrote:

 ZergSmasher wrote:
I thought the change to free strats was just the restriction to Battle Tactics only. Or was there another one? Where does this targeting restriction come from?

Edit: Re-read the dataslate and found it, but I don't think it kills using those abilities on Command Re-roll, as the restriction only applies to strats that are targeting multiple units (it says nothing about that you can't use it on a strat that has no target at all).

The Command Re-roll problem comes from the Will of the Hive Mind: "Once per turn, one friendly Tyranids unit within 12"...can be targeted with a Stratagem for 0CP."

Command Re-roll has no target, so you can't target a friendly unit with it. This issue doesn't come out of the Balance Dataslate; it's been there all along.

The "Surprise Assault" problem comes from the Balance Dataslate:

Rules that modify the CP cost of a Stratagem when
you target a particular unit can only do so for a
Stratagem that targets multiple units if every unit
you target has the same ability to modify the CP of
that Stratagem.

Surprise Assault targets both a Tyranid Vanguard Invader unit AND an enemy unit (which won't have the "0CP" ability).

Okay, thanks for the clarification, I think I'm on the same page now. I expect Command Re-roll needs to be clarified as targeting the unit that is having one of its dice rerolled, and Surprise Assault definitely needs to be FAQ'd, as I think RAI it should be usable (that's dumb that it should require the ENEMY to have something).

Here's a random thought: how well would a couple of Harpies play in the Vanguard?

The play here is the "Seeded Broods" and "Invisible Hunter" stratagems. Leave the Harpies in Aircraft mode, and use Seeded Broods to begin doing fly-overs on Turn 1, without caring about end positioning (because you'll use Invisible Hunter to pull them off the table prior to your next turn). And just keep repeating, all game long.

How much are we willing to pay for roughly 40 mortal wounds (~4 wounds * 5 turns * 2 Harpies) on specific targets throughout the game? Does it even work, given that a) Seeded Broods works on units in Reserves, and b) Aircraft are placed into Reserves, but then treated as being in Strategic Reserves after the battle starts?


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 Janthkin wrote:
Does it even work, given that a) Seeded Broods works on units in Reserves, and b) Aircraft are placed into Reserves, but then treated as being in Strategic Reserves after the battle starts?

Rules Commentary wrote:Reserves Units: Any unit that starts the battle in a location other
than the battlefield, and is not embarked within a Transport that
starts the battle on the battlefield, is considered to be a Reserves
unit. When a Reserves unit is set up on the battlefield, it counts as
having made a Normal move that phase. Any Reserves units that
have not been set up on the battlefield by the end of the battle count
as destroyed. Units can still use rules and abilities while in Reserves.

I'm content with this as an answer to my question - if you're not on the battlefield at the start of the game, you're in Reserves. Strategic Reserves, then, is just a rule to allow for entry from Reserves (if you don't already have an alternative like Deep Strike).

 Janthkin wrote:
Here's a random thought: how well would a couple of Harpies play in the Vanguard?

Poorly, because Harpies are awful. Somehow 215 points for a single (terrible) Heavy Venom Cannon and 4 S7 attacks in melee (and that's before you even get to the many problems aircraft have in 10th). Many things suffered in the Great Twin-Link-en-ing. The Harpy was one of the worst hit.

Then they offered a glimmer of hope in the Codex by making it 165 points. Then they dashed those hopes by putting its cost up 50 points in the next points release.

This is the result of the Harpy being good in a previous edition, so clearly it needs nerfing in a new rules base. Being able to advance and charge won't help it. I doubt using them as a gimmick army to deliver MW is going to be worth the expense. There has to be better things to spend your CP (let alone your actual points) on.

I'm taking the following to a large tournament next weekend:

Winged Hive Tyrant (Chameleonic)
Broodlord (Neuronode)
Broodlord (Stalker)
Deathleaper

10x Gargoyles
10x Gargoyles
10x Termagants

10x Genestealers
10x Genestealers
Lictor
Lictor
Neurolictor
Neurolictor
6x Zoanthropes
Tyrannocyte
Barbed Hierodule
1x Ripper Swarm

I've had a bit of a revelation on Neuronode. So long as you don't have more than 6 units that will be hanging out in the open, it's pretty fantastic - for example, when I deploy the above list, I'll aggressively deploy the 2 Neurolictors & the Winged Hive Tyrant, and defensively deploy the 2 Lictors & Deathleaper. Depending on the first turn roll, I'll redeploy one set or the other. (Meanwhile, the Genestealers will have to be deployed such that Scout moves can be either aggressive or defensive.) That actually does seem worth 30 pts to me. We'll see how that plays out.

I feel the key to playing vanguard is the balance in taking the keyworded units and the rest of the army. You don't need a lot of units to tie up people in the deployment zone.

My lictor units tag team unit.

I take it you are having issues with walkers like knight's? Stealth works vs shooting even if you are in close combat..?

I do think the flyrant can be left at home. But He is a big target for most people though. So maybe not. His main goal is to hit with the von-ryans, then bounce to back field targets that are troublesome. He is a good loan op hunter. his threat range makes him great for that.

Necrons hate the precision attack this army brings. Between combat cans shooting you can kill most units leaders on key units. than run away for you shooting heavy hits kill the rest.

A brief report back after my weekend:
My list went 2-4.

Wins:
Game 2: CSM (mixed Nurgle & Slaanesh; big unit of Slaaneshi Possessed, some oblits & other things)
Game 3: Aeldari (2x Spiriseer Wraithguard, Yncarne, 2x Fire Prism & 1x Nightspinner)

Losses:
Game 1: Aeldari (1x Spiritseer Wraithguard, Yncarne, 3x Nightspinner)
Game 4: Space Marines (Stormlance - actually Space Wolves, with lots of Thunderwolves, 3 Dreadnoughts, and a giant tank with a million guns)
Game 5: Imperial Knights (1 giant Lancer & 10 Armigers)
Game 6: Tyranids (Synapse, 3x Exocrine & 3x Maleceptor)

Some thoughts:
1) If I played it again, I could win that game against the Aeldari. I wasn't paying enough attention (first game of the day, and I had a lot of breakage that I was trying to repair before the game), and totally missed that the Spiritseer was there. What I learned in this game helped me win the next game against Aeldari.
2) Didn't go first, and lost a unit of Genestealers to the Possessed. The second unit of Genestealers, plus all the lictor-types, then destroyed the Possessed. This was the game where the Advance + Charge mattered most, as it allowed that unit of 'stealers to play clean-up on 3 different units during the game.
3) Lictor-types jump a unit of Wraithguard, Precision until the Spiritseer dies, then jump out on my next turn to go to the other unit of Wraithguard while the 'stealers clean up. The Yncarne dies to a million scratches from a unit of 'stealers (half-damage isn't relevant to D1 Devestating Wounds).
4) Thunderwolves are faster, hit harder, and have a stratagem that lets then move 10", auto-advance 9", and then charge. I lost 1 unit of Stealers to a first-turn charge, counter-charged and eventually destroyed that unit, only to have a second large unit come in and wipe out most of what I had left. There are some small things I could have done (and it would have been nice if the Zoanthropes didn't completely whiff when then came in), but basically he did everything I did, better.
5) Ignore this game; it was a bye round for both me & my opponent, and my opponent was very grumpy; I turned down the competitive dial all the way.
6) Most telling game of the weekend. I got my turn 1 charge off, almost perfectly. Didn't matter. The Neurotyrant w/the flamer (and Synapse enhancement), plus the Stratagems available to the Synapse detachment were just brutal - he absorbed my charge, at the cost of a Maleceptor, some Tyrant Guard, a Neurolictor, and some random wounds, and then preceded to clobber my units.

Thinking it over, I don't think the Vanguard detachment is worth it. I can take almost the same army, put it in the Synapse Detachment, and am better for it all around.